Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the member for Edmonton--St. Albert for highlighting various aspects of the budget. We are proud of the fact that we have kept our promises on a number of social files. Yes, the budget is a great budget in the fact that it talks about a green economy, about housing and about the doubling of foreign aid to Africa. It also addresses issues of concern when it comes to post-secondary education.
However what is fascinating is that members opposite have only recently converted to the importance of these social files. In fact, when the budget was first presented the Leader of the Opposition rushed out, gushing to reporters about corporate tax cuts.
What the opposition was gushing about was the corporate cuts for its Conservative corporate clients. What is fascinating is that as soon as there was a bump-up in the polls, the Conservatives went back on their word. They pulled their support for this budget that this member opposite is now gushing about and talking about the importance of these social files.
If they are so concerned about these social files and not their corporate clients, why would they not be concerned about the 900 million additional dollars going into the budget? There is the Alberta energy lobby.
Why are they not concerned about an additional $1.6 billion for housing? Their corporate clients are not very concerned about people out on the streets.
Why are they not concerned about $500 million for foreign aid? There are not a lot of Conservative voters in developing countries.
I would just like to find out why the recent conversion. Is it not a matter of hypocrisy and is there real concern that there is $4.6 billion that, instead of going to their corporate clients, is going to students, to foreign aid to housing and into taking care of the environment?